What's new

Spider-man 3 - On Going Developments (1 Viewer)

PopBodhi

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
321
Real Name
Randall

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. The cityscape shots were much better than Spider-Man where numerous scenes involving the Twin Towers were removed after 9/11. Spider-Man 2 had far too many "low swinging" Spider-Man shots. Absent were the towering skyscraper shots that made the 1978 Superman film so memorable. Finally, Spider-Man three gave us great shots of the tops of buildings and even included a few beautiful shots of the Empire State Building!
 

Ken Chan

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 11, 1999
Messages
3,302
Real Name
Ken
That's disingenuous. At rottentomatoes, 61% of critics liked it -- so yes, that's "most". (Although only 45% of their "cream of the crop", however those are chosen, did.) But look at Spider-Man 2: 93%/95%. Spider-Man 3 is worse, and it's not even close. If [nearly] all critics liked my work, that's something I'd crow about. If it's "less than half thought it sucked", I wouldn't make that big a deal :)

I'm glad I didn't contribute to the record opening weekend. I caught it this past weekend, along with a three-year-old that babbled through the whole thing. It's just not a very good movie for all the reasons mentioned. I'll also add that not only was kissing Gwen Stacy tactically dangerous regarding his mask, but he did it knowing his would-be-fiancee was watching, doing "their kiss". I dunno about the movie's supposed moral lessons; that was just plain stupid.
 

Lou Sytsma

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 1, 1998
Messages
6,103
Real Name
Lou Sytsma
Easy Ratner has nothing in his portfolio to suggest such a beast would exist for any of his movies.
 

Bryan^H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
9,512
Let's just hope that there won't be another Spiderman movie.
Spiderman 3 much like X-Men 3, is just a tragic mess. Calling the character development, and story in both of these films flimsy would be an understatement. One word comes to mind for both....dumb.
I think the Marvel super hero movies have outlived their goodness, and the stupid material these good actors are given, makes them look bad. Spiderman 3 was laughable in the worst sort of Mystery Science Theater way. Spiderman 3 made Star Wars Attack Of The Clones look like an Oscar worthy film.

It's just a good thing the DC super hero films(except Catwoman) are quality that seems will continue.
 

Ocean Phoenix

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
591


DC's recent superhero movies record isn't totally flawless. "Batman Begins" may be almost unanimously loved (although even it has its fair share of detractors), but "Superman Returns" is very controversial and has taken a lot of criticism. I actually think it's flawed in many of the same ways as "Spider-Man 3". It annoyed me for a lot of the same reasons (too sappy, not enough fun) and left me not wanting to see another Superman movie.
 

JonZ

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 28, 1998
Messages
7,799
""Superman Returns" is very controversial and has taken a lot of criticism. I actually think it's flawed in many of the same ways as "Spider-Man 3". It annoyed me for a lot of the same reasons (too sappy, not enough fun) and left me not wanting to see another Superman movie."

Seeing a film enthusiast I havent seen in years, who helped get me into HT all those years ago, he almost became violent when I mentioned Superman Returns. He really hated it that much. Like myself he also considers the original holy. I remember him saying "you dont f*&% with the mythology".

I think SR is better than SM3 is almost every way and drastically prefer it. Its different than Batman for me because I never liked the 89 film so it was easy to forget while SR sort of added to what was before it. I didnt see SR as sappy and I thought the emotion in that film worked much better than anything in SM3. I cared about Superman. I didnt care about Peter P in SM3,which is so disappointing(after the IMHO amazing SM2).Parts of SM3 are heartbreakingly bad. SR does have its flaws, but to me, theyre easier to overlook because so I liked so much of it and even loved alot of it.

I had my doubts but Singer won me over. I wont go into it in this thread, I did in the SR threads we had, but IMHO he made one of the great superhero movies weve gotten so far.

Hopefully with the reboot out of the way Singer will make fans happier with the next one.

And Im not ready to write Spidey off yet. I want to give it another try. My main problem with the X franchise is whos in charge of it and as Ive said before I wont see another superhero film that studio makes unless theres a great creative team involved who has real creative control.
 

Sam Favate

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
12,948
Real Name
Sam Favate
Sony has already said there will be a Spiderman 4, 5, 6 and more if they can continue to come up with good stories to tell. (Which means until the box office runs out.)

What is the X-Kids movie you're talking about? I thought the next film would be Wolverine, followed by Magneto.
 

DavidPla

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
2,357

Those are the solo projects but they're still pushing for an "X-Men 4" which would consist of the younger generation of Mutants that they started hinting at in X3.
 

Bryan^H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
9,512
Superman Returns was a very uneven film, but at least there was a story to be told, and it was a beautiful looking film. Singer said the sequel will be a much more action oriented film.

With X-Men 3, the story lost focus, and Ratner was not a good choice as director. He's a music video director, and it was very apparent watching X-3 with all those quick cuts. I don't have ADD, so maybe that's why I couldn't enjoy it.

Spiderman 3 was a movie gone terribly wrong. It started ok, but just got increasingly worse. I hope Tobey Macguire doesn't sign on for the fourth installment. This would force the studio to make drastic changes, or start from scratch, and after Spidey 3, believe me when I say change is good.
 

PopBodhi

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
321
Real Name
Randall
Well it looks like Spider-Man 3 will hit $300,000,000 by next weekend. Loving it! I'm strutting like John Travolta or, maybe, Tobey Maguire!
 

MikeRS

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 17, 2002
Messages
1,326
The first hour wasn't bad. It seemed to be juggling and setting up alot of possibly interesting story threads. The action sequence were very well done (I thought the set-pieces were excellent except the climactic one. That one was dreadful. More on that at the bottom).


But....


The moment Mary Jane goes to see Harry at his apartment, the film goes off the rails. MJ was already coming off as a self absorbed bitch during the first half (especially following the revelations/climax of Spidey2). Her characterization seemed very forced - as if the screenwriters were pushing conflict where it was not needed or believable in storytelling terms(Kinda of reminded me of the worst tendencies of the LOTR adaptation). And when Harry regains his memory and forces MJ to confront Peter to end the relationship (plausibility zero!), you could feel the audience twitching. Peter's crybaby blubbering reaction had the audience rolling on the aisles.

(In the year of '300', methinks audiences don't have time for pansy boys :P ;) )

I thought the dark Peter Parker sequences to be detrimental to the picture in the sense that they destroyed any chance for a viewer to take the film's tale seriously from here on (due to the radical tonal change).

But I loved it on a pure camp entertainment level. :D I was giggling the whole way through it. It was like watching "Anchorman" or an old school Jim Carrey picture for about 15 minutes of running timing!

There was also a great audience participation moment when Peter hits MJ at the climax of the vignette (everone in unison --- oooohhhhhhh)

I despised the retconning of Spidey's origin story. Again, it was a poor 'quick and easy path' method for the screenwriters to jack up Sandman's importance in the plot. It just didn't ring true, and didn't make up the lost ground from his shafting in the narrative (Thank you, Avi!).

The rest of the film was a disaster on a screenplay level. The last in a long line of coincidences in the film (Brock's creation) definitely would have been believable in a silver age comic book. And perhaps, easier to swallow in a stronger film. But it just pissed me off here because it came off as just more transparent screenwriting shortcuts (like most of the rest of the film). Don't get me started on the awful jarring editing/transition to the Venom/Sandman team-up. WTF!?

The climax action set-piece was just poorly concieved and edited. Venom really was a retarded looking villain.The newscasting was so distancing. The action beats were poorly choreographed (reminded me of the worst qualities of Spidey 1). And the forgiveness thematics being layed on thick came off as incredibly contrived. IT WASN'T EARNED. Sandman just wasn't built up enough in the narrative to make that moment ring true emotionally. It really left a bad taste in your mouth as you left the theater. The Coup de grâce

Conclusion:

4 of the 5 action set-pieces are worth seeing on a big screen with big sound. :) ;)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,582
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
1
Top